Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATEEK JALAN
Pooja – Appellant
Versus
Ministry of Ayush – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging admission process for ayurveda courses. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. eligibility criteria for counselling rounds. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. interpretation of eligibility provisions is reasonable. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. petition dismissed, no grounds for interference. (Para 19) |
JUDGMENT
Prateek Jalan, J. (Oral)--The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.
W.P.(C) 3267/2021 with CM APPL. 9949/2021 (for stay)
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution concerns a challenge to the admission process for post-graduate courses in Ayurveda for the academic year 2020-21.
Facts
2. The petitioner completed an undergraduate degree in Ayurveda, and aspired for admission in post-graduate courses. For this purpose, she took the entrance examination held on 28.09.2020. The results of the examination were published on 04.11.2020. The petitioner obtained an All-India Rank of 2708 in the relevant category, being the Unreserved category ["UR category"]. All-India counselling was held in three rounds, with a fourth round of counselling by the States. The petitioner participated in all three rounds of
Court upheld the interpretation of admission guidelines, confirming eligibility of candidates who participated in earlier rounds for subsequent rounds in the counselling process.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Clause 1.5 of Chapter 1 of the NEET-PG (MD/MS/DNB/MDS) Counselling, 2023, which restricts candidates from par....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to the rules and timelines set in the counselling process, the need to avoid disrupting settled admission processes, and the lack of a vested right ....
The court emphasized the application of Rule 12 (8) (ka) of the M.P. Medical Education (Admission) Rules, 2018, which governs the inclusion of vacant seats in subsequent rounds of counselling.
No legal right vested in the petitioner for allocation of vacant seat, as admission processes are bound by established counseling protocols, reflecting the principle of no fault leading to no prejudi....
The court upheld that an upgrade in seat allocation excludes candidates from participating in subsequent admission rounds, aligning with the established university admission policy.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of preserving merit in the admission process for Post-Graduate Medical Courses, despite deviations from the admission rules and the ....
Vacancy is created either because of non-allocation of seat or candidate not taking admission on allocated seat.
The court upheld the principle of merit-cum-choice in admissions, confirming that procedural fairness is essential when rectifying errors in provisional seat allotment results.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
